When shot-based stats tell me how good Jonathan Toews is or the Kings are, I believe them. When they tell me that Josh Bailey is good or that the Devils are better than the Penguins, then I don't, just like any other secondary statistic.

corsi and fenwick are not what bases are in baseball. They are more like QB passer ratings to my mind. They tend to overrate certain kinds of players and certain kinds of teams.
- Snowblind

Agreed.

Do you think hedman is a generational talent?
- Cptmjl

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Not in any generation.

XxNYIxX

"However at some point the player has to look in the mirror and be self-motivated to maximize their potential. We saw it with Kyle Okposo last season, now lets hope with can see it with Josh Bailey."

See, it's incorrect comments like this that get people's hopes irrationally high about players like Bailey, which in turn makes them more upset when the player doesn't do it. Okposo didn't "look in the mirror" one day and decide to be good; he'd shown signs of being a good player for years. His possession numbers were always good, and he had scored 20+ goals and 50+ points in a season before last year. He just had a few injuries which really set him back. Once healthy, he had the season everyone knew he could have.

Just because Okposo did that does not mean Bailey will. The difference is that Bailey has never shown the ability to produce like that, besides extremely small spurts. If Bailey has some huge season this year, it will be out of nowhere; Okposo's huge season wasn't really out of nowhere. He just needed to be 100% healthy.
- isles10289

Completely different player- Okposo is a power forward, who needed (among other things) to grow into his body, and to become strong enough on his skates and the puck to be able to do what a power forward does. Once he established his strength and confidence, he finally became what we all thought he could be.

Bailey, in contrast, appeared in junior to be a center in the Adam Oates vein, mostly because he had Taylor Hall to dish the puck to on a nightly basis. He has never adjusted to the mental "speed" necessary to play in the NHL, and he's shown no sign (at least to me, anyway) of that ever happening. He also doesn't have the physical attributes to play center at this level, so he is basically going to have to transform himself from the puck distributing center he was in junior into a goal scoring winger, or else he's going to find himself in the seats (well, he should anyway- annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd, cue the circus music, in 3, 2, 1..... ).

He's no longer a top six forward, given this roster. A lot would have to change to make that last statement false, and I'm guessing it may be too late. Unless he does a total 180 this year, starting in early September, he really should be moved out for the best we can get for him. If he's not going to start and contribute, he's a waste of a depth slot on the major league roster- doesn't kill penalties, doesn't kick a$$....doesn't do anything else that's useful, either. Buh-bye.....

Its not short sighted. It's a result based analysis. Who gives a s**t how many shots Bailey gets off or how long he dangles the puck for if he doesn't score and is on the ice for lots of goals against? Inever said advanced sstatistics don't matter, just that they're not as important as whether Bailey is productive. Goals, assists, points and plus/minus reveal if Bailey is productive. high possession numbers don't put pucks in the net. that's my point.
- Jethro09

Listen I'm not trying to turn this into an argument and drag it out all day but that's not what you said. Your exact words were "The inly numbers that matter are goals, assists, poinfs and plus/minus".

Nobody can force you to accept them as valuable but the fact is that they are. You're starting to see teams around the league hire advanced metrics guys in their front offices. The league as a whole is starting to understand that it's not just some hokey gimmick and that it actually holds a significant amount of value. It doesn't mean that these stats are replacing things like goals and assists.

EDIT: And just like that, another one of those advanced stats bloggers just announced that he was hired by an NHL team today.

I think the end of your article alluded to what is really the answer. Bailey is a 3rd line player. We have all been waiting forever for him to be a top 6 guy, but It just may be that he is a decent bottom 6 guy.
- niteislander

That has been my other argument- if you're going to use this kid, he's either going to have to become a pure goal scorer, or you have to teach him to play defense and kill penalties. He's already comfortable playing with Nielsen, so at least he has that going for him. He just doesn't seem to have the "vision" (which is a nice way of saying hockey IQ) to contribute consistently to the offense, so his only use would be if you could turn him into that type of player, instead of using him as he has been used to this point. That said, of course, we likely have better than him at those positions, too- to me, it's an uphill battle for him to make the starting roster at all, and as I said, if he's going to sit in the seats, he might as well do that somewhere else.

Listen I'm not trying to turn this into an argument and drag it out all day but that's not what you said. Your exact words were "The inly numbers that matter are goals, assists, poinfs and plus/minus".

Nobody can force you to accept them as valuable but the fact is that they are. You're starting to see teams around the league hire advanced metrics guys in their front offices. The league as a whole is starting to understand that it's not just some hokey gimmick and that it actually holds a significant amount of value. It doesn't mean that these stats are replacing things like goals and assists.

EDIT: And just like that, another one of those advanced stats bloggers just announced that he was hired by an NHL team today.
- eichiefs9

Saying that goals, assists, points and plus/minus are what matter is not the same as saying "advanced statistics are worthless" or "don't matter". But I stand by what I said, if Bailey puts up points and is a plus player this season he will have had a good season. If he doesn't, he won't have had a good season, regardless of what his advanced statistics say.

Saying that goals, assists, points and plus/minus are what matter is not the same as saying "advanced statistics are worthless" or "don't matter". But I stand by what I said, if Bailey puts up points and is a plus player this season he will have had a good season. If he doesn't, he won't have had a good season, regardless of what his advanced statistics say.
- Jethro09

Ok, well I guess we're going to just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Why is it that everybody who opposes thinking outside the box assumes that those who consider advanced metrics valuable are soapboxing that it's the end-all-be-all of player evaluation? It's a useful tool* in helping to form an opinion on a player.


*Useful tool: As in, a chopsaw is a useful tool in building a house, but nobody is saying you can build a house using only that.
- eichiefs9

I don't think there is a "pro" and "anti" stats division. It's more like some disagreement over just how much weight to put behind them, blown out of proportion and exaggerated like everything else today to make it seem like it's the supremely enlightened versus knuckle draggers. I'm certainly guilty...I think some people go overboard with the stats to the point where it feels like they want you to gouge out your own eyes if they lead you to a different conclusion than a stat readout, but that's probably just an exaggeration of my own.

You said they're a tool. Agreed...but I'd say basic stats (G, A, Pts, etc.) are like a screwdriver: useful and familiar, with little chance of serious injury, and you know when you should and shouldn't use one. The advanced stats are like a chainsaw: definitely useful, but a bit more dangerous in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they're doing. Also really cool and when you first get your hands on one, every piece of wood looks like something that needs to be sawed in half. I think it'll be better when the shine wears off and the chainsaw is put away, only to be taken out when it's actually appropriate...and that's not in an unnecessary debate about the merits of Peter Regin's time as an Islander.

Saying that goals, assists, points and plus/minus are what matter is not the same as saying "advanced statistics are worthless" or "don't matter". But I stand by what I said, if Bailey puts up points and is a plus player this season he will have had a good season. If he doesn't, he won't have had a good season, regardless of what his advanced statistics say.
- Jethro09

I have to agree. I love the advanced stats, i think they complete the picture of a player when all is taken into account. But if Josh Bailey doesn't contribute on the score sheet, skating around in circles playing keep away from the other team for 13min a night just isn't going to cut it.

XxNYIxX

That has been my other argument- if you're going to use this kid, he's either going to have to become a pure goal scorer, or you have to teach him to play defense and kill penalties. He's already comfortable playing with Nielsen, so at least he has that going for him. He just doesn't seem to have the "vision" (which is a nice way of saying hockey IQ) to contribute consistently to the offense, so his only use would be if you could turn him into that type of player, instead of using him as he has been used to this point. That said, of course, we likely have better than him at those positions, too- to me, it's an uphill battle for him to make the starting roster at all, and as I said, if he's going to sit in the seats, he might as well do that somewhere else.
- dcb1

^^^^
This!

I'm not defending him, all I was saying was that he would be a useful 3rd liner. If calling a guy a decent bottom 6 forward is defending him then...I don't know.
- eichiefs9

Defend was the wrong word to use.

I have to agree. I love the advanced stats, i think they complete the picture of a player when all is taken into account. But if Josh Bailey doesn't contribute on the score sheet, skating around in circles playing keep away from the other team for 13min a night just isn't going to cut it.

XxNYIxX
- XxNYIxX

That is going to cut it though. Of course this is an exaggeration to make my point, but if Bailey can go out there and prevent the other team from touching the puck for 13 minutes out of 60 that's putting us at a huge advantage to win the game. That means if guys like Tavares and the other skill players can do their job and score..and Halak and the defense can do their job...then we would be highly likely to win.

It's an old, annoying, and overplayed adage...but the other team can't score if they don't have the puck.

I don't think there is a "pro" and "anti" stats division. It's more like some disagreement over just how much weight to put behind them, blown out of proportion and exaggerated like everything else today to make it seem like it's the supremely enlightened versus knuckle draggers. I'm certainly guilty...I think some people go overboard with the stats to the point where it feels like they want you to gouge out your own eyes if they lead you to a different conclusion than a stat readout, but that's probably just an exaggeration of my own.

You said they're a tool. Agreed...but I'd say basic stats (G, A, Pts, etc.) are like a screwdriver: useful and familiar, with little chance of serious injury, and you know when you should and shouldn't use one. The advanced stats are like a chainsaw: definitely useful, but a bit more dangerous in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they're doing. Also really cool and when you first get your hands on one, every piece of wood looks like something that needs to be sawed in half. I think it'll be better when the shine wears off and the chainsaw is put away, only to be taken out when it's actually appropriate...and that's not in an unnecessary debate about the merits of Peter Regin's time as an Islander.
- UIF

I think when it comes to evaluating top-6-tier talent, yes absolutely the basic stats are most important. Those are the guys that you expect to produce and they should be held to that. But when you start getting into evaluating bottom 6 talent it gets murky and that's where I weight advanced stats as far more valuable. No third liner is putting up 60pts, so would you rather have a guy that keeps the puck on Islander sticks when he's on the ice or someone who can't do that?

Why did we sign Conacher again.. and why is he not discussed in any scenario?

The Ranger fans are debating the pros and cons of trading for Crosby

I think when it comes to evaluating top-6-tier talent, yes absolutely the basic stats are most important. Those are the guys that you expect to produce and they should be held to that. But when you start getting into evaluating bottom 6 talent it gets murky and that's where I weight advanced stats as far more valuable. No third liner is putting up 60pts, so would you rather have a guy that keeps the puck on Islander sticks when he's on the ice or someone who can't do that?
- eichiefs9

Regin had better possession numbers than Clutterbuck. Who would you rather have on the Isles' third or fourth line going into next season?

Edit...I'll add that if I'm a GM going into next season with a hole on the fourth line, then yes, all other things being equal (two players that fill the same type of role and play the same type of game) I would definitely take possession into serious consideration.

Why did we sign Conacher again.. and why is he not discussed in any scenario?
- niteislander

Part I -- I have no idea
Part II -- Because we're trying to pretend it never happened and hoping that he won't be gifted a roster spot just because he was an offseason acquisition.

The Ranger fans are debating the pros and cons of trading for Crosby
- eichiefs9

the only 2 cons are Health and what it would cost in picks/prospects and players.

XxNYIxX

Regin had better possession numbers than Clutterbuck. Who would you rather have on the Isles' third or fourth line going into next season?

Edit...I'll add that if I'm a GM going into next season with a hole on the fourth line, then yes, all other things being equal (two players that fill the same type of role and play the same type of game) I would definitely take possession into serious consideration.
- UIF

Regin's numbers were over playing half a season compared to Clutterbuck's nearly full season. The drawback with those stats is that you need a big sample to really see the value. Players regress to the mean over a long period of time.

I think when it comes to evaluating top-6-tier talent, yes absolutely the basic stats are most important. Those are the guys that you expect to produce and they should be held to that. But when you start getting into evaluating bottom 6 talent it gets murky and that's where I weight advanced stats as far more valuable. No third liner is putting up 60pts, so would you rather have a guy that keeps the puck on Islander sticks when he's on the ice or someone who can't do that?
- eichiefs9

By the way, you should write that advanced stats blog you were talking about. Post it wherever...My HockeyBuzz or in that forum where we staged the Revolution. It's a good topic to talk/argue about.

By the way, you should write that advanced stats blog you were talking about. Post it wherever...My HockeyBuzz or in that forum where we staged the Revolution. It's a good topic to talk/argue about.
- UIF

I'll just post it in Dee's comment section

the only 2 cons are Health and what it would cost in picks/prospects and players.

XxNYIxX
- XxNYIxX

I'd give up Tavares, Nielsen, Nelson, Strome and our next four first rounders and a seventh rd pick in 2020 to sweeten the deal.

I'm not defending him, all I was saying was that he would be a useful 3rd liner. If calling a guy a decent bottom 6 forward is defending him then...I don't know.
- eichiefs9

Eh...I think there are tons of players who can be 'useful' 3rd liners. I'm definitely not going to use corsi stats (not saying you are) based on a players 2nd liner performance to justify their usefulness in a 3rd line role, which may be a very different approach.

The bigger problem to me with things like corsi is, it's a new found way to tell you to stop believing your eyes and start searching for numbers that may be used to weaken the observers point of view. In the case of Bailey, what we know as fact is that the kid plays with very little passion. He shows glimpses of a kid that can dangle the puck, see the ice, take a good shot, but they have only been glimpses over a 6 year period now. One thing I don't want on my third line is a guy who doesn't seem to have consistent intensity.

I don't think there is a "pro" and "anti" stats division. It's more like some disagreement over just how much weight to put behind them, blown out of proportion and exaggerated like everything else today to make it seem like it's the supremely enlightened versus knuckle draggers. I'm certainly guilty...I think some people go overboard with the stats to the point where it feels like they want you to gouge out your own eyes if they lead you to a different conclusion than a stat readout, but that's probably just an exaggeration of my own.

You said they're a tool. Agreed...but I'd say basic stats (G, A, Pts, etc.) are like a screwdriver: useful and familiar, with little chance of serious injury, and you know when you should and shouldn't use one. The advanced stats are like a chainsaw: definitely useful, but a bit more dangerous in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they're doing. Also really cool and when you first get your hands on one, every piece of wood looks like something that needs to be sawed in half. I think it'll be better when the shine wears off and the chainsaw is put away, only to be taken out when it's actually appropriate...and that's not in an unnecessary debate about the merits of Peter Regin's time as an Islander.
- UIF

This is just flat out fantastic

Regin had better possession numbers than Clutterbuck. Who would you rather have on the Isles' third or fourth line going into next season?

Edit...I'll add that if I'm a GM going into next season with a hole on the fourth line, then yes, all other things being equal (two players that fill the same type of role and play the same type of game) I would definitely take possession into serious consideration.
- UIF

Now, here's another issue. If you take a player like Bailey and say, based on his posession stats, he'd make a good third liner, who's to say a player with lesser possession stats elsewhere wouldn't have thrived more in Bailey's situation. Yet because of the interest in these advanced stats, Bailey gets the leg up because of his stated numbers. To me, it all still comes back to watching the player and seeing how they perform, then applying their skillset to your approach.